Hillf Danton <hdanton@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I think this change might be useful as it also documents > > this requirement. > > Yes it is boy and the current reproducer triggered another warning [1,2]. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240706231332.3261-1-hdanton@xxxxxxxx/ The WARN is incorrect. The destroy list can be non-empty; i already tried to explain why.
